tv The Dylan Ratigan Show MSNBC May 18, 2012 4:00pm-5:00pm EDT
afternoon to you from san francisco. i am dylan ratigan, and no, i did not pick up anything from facebook. we are, however, in the cradle of innovation where one of two major money stories are playing out today. as we speak, facebook, you surely know, closing out its first ever trading day on the nasdaq. it opened this morning at $38 a share. it's closing this afternoon at nearly exactly the same spot. we've got a mega mega panel to talk all about not only facebook but the culture and the good things about this deal, and also what it tells us about what we still need to work on when it comes to actually valuing the communities in these social networks. but first, the big bombshell in new york this friday. jamie dimon officially and entirely tarnished. we're talking about what millions of americans saw on the front page of this morning's wall street journal, that jp morgan's ceo, jamie dimon, truly at the pinnacle of the too big
to fail banking apparatus not only knew about the disastrous trades at his bank, he gave them his blessing. backing those risky moves that led to losses now approaching $5 billion, but more importantly suggests an extraordinarily fragile financial system still. the journal also reporting that dimon never monitored any of the trades he approved. why would you when the government is going to pay when the whole thing goes wrong, anyway, gets too big? and clearly jamie dimon knew the enormity of the situation telling his wife that he, quote, missed something bad, something that was allowed to happen because of an unreformed financial system that continues to operate on layers and layers and layers of secrecy and leverage. meanwhile, the american taxpayer and voter is supervised by a white house treasury department and justice department operating on layers of indifference and funded by jamie dimon and his
banker friends on both sides of the political aisle. is it any wonder they turn a blind eye? joining us now, banking analysts mike mayo, author of "exile on wall street." mike, you have become one of the more out spoken folks out there on this issue. let's make it clear, there is nothing offensive about banking to you, there is nothing offensive to you about wall street or a culture of lending or a culture of investing or opportunity speaking or all those things, it is simply the inspection that was approved d and ordained of a too big to fail banking apparatus. what do we not understand about what happened at jp morgan that you do? >> i think what's very disappointing is that these losses were in in an area that was about taking risk, it was in an area that was about reducing risk. it's as if i went out to get insurance on my house and a month later i tell my wife, i
lost $100,000 on the insurance. i would be like, what's taking place here? there are so many layers at a company like jpmorgan or any large banks, it's a lot more than any one bad trade. and the significance of what happened this week and last week at jpmorgan is that it's a reminder that some of these banks might not only be too big to manage, too big to regulate and too big to fail but also too big to understand, if not even the ceo can get his arms around the situation. >> so again, and i know that you are somebody who has a very sophisticated understanding of this industry, a very strong relationship with many of the larger shareholders and people who finance many of these banks. is there a mechanism -- if somebody wanted to do it, could you reform the too big to fail banks in a way that was beneficial to our economy, beneficial to wall street, and ultimately refocused on
opportunity-seeking behavior as opposed to this risk transfer we've sort of fallen into. >> dylan, as you know, the reason i wrote the book is i saw two decades of one factor more than any other caused the crisis in what's still taking place today. and that's faulty incentives. i get very discouraged to see those same faulty incentives in place. i'm also very hopeful of the shareholder reaction. shareholders spoke up like never before. what we need is for the overseeers to stop getting paid and that still takes place by the regulators with the revol revolving door and a lot of other examples. >> jamie dimon made $23 million in 2011. the nice thing about selling insurance is much as we saw in '06, '05, the bonuses, and now
we're seeing in '10, '11, still having the same bonuses, you pay yourself ahead of time, and then we don't have any call-backs in place, and it really is a wonderful system for them. if you were to begin the reforming process, would it begin with their holder, tim geithn geithner, the president, and what would be some things that we the people would want to ask our politicians to do to intervene on a system that i think we all are learning is incredibly hostile to our national security? >> i would say if president obama this week did one thing exactly correct and one thing that was wrong, exactly correct is when he said if it could even happen to a better than average banker such as jamie dimon, ceo, jpmorgan, what does that mean for the rest of the industry? i think that is a negative sign and the president was exactly correct.
where he was wrong was being so cozy with jamie dimon as if they were best buddies, bffs, best friends forever -- i learned that from my six-year-old -- and to say jamie dimon is a good banker, that's a little too much closeness. we need that separation between the government and the regulators, the bankers, so we need to go back to the way it used to be when i worked for the fed in the 1980s, and back to the 1950s and '60s when you had that separation between business and government. >> is that achievable? the argument that the bankers will say is they will say, listen, with the complexity in size, and that's great, but dylan has this high principle that's with all these people speaking to their own level of expertise to this issue, but they would say dylan is too ignorant, he could never understand. you could never put the genie back in the bottle.
is there validity to that? >> you absolutely can. a stands for accounting. gets the numbers right. b stands for bankruptcy. allow the banks and corporations to fail when they get in trouble. if they do well, let the ceos make a lot of money. it's america. and c, reduce the clout from the ceos and give it more to the shareholders and other stakeholders to overlook what they're doing. >> accounting? >> accounting, bankruptcy and clout. a, b, c. that's my solution. it works. >> can i use that? >> please do. >> all right, mike. it's a pleasure. thanks for coming out to help educate us further on something i know is important but sometimes a challenge to get your head around. mike mayo, "exile on wall street" is the book. we turn now to the other big piece of money news in america today. west coast style, the nasdaq is where they listed. the closing bell ringing just a few minutes ago signalling the end of facebook's first ever public trading day. the stock closing more or less
even with its $38 ipo price. we've got a mega-mega panel. we'll work through the layers of this but i want to start with the deal itself before we get into the ethics and/or business implications of monetizing the crowd. rob, i'll start with you. forget anything else. this is a huge testament to the quality of the bankers to be able to take a company this complex, this he esoteric with s ambiguous of a growth trajectory, turn it into a priced asset as a public company and they hit it dead on. it didn't spike up, didn't go down. they're like, what's it worth? it's worth $38. not an easy feat. >> that's true, but we'll have to see this in a month's time. you know as well as i do, dylan, that the underwriters in this case led by morgan stanley were out there like crazy supporting the stock because the last thing
they want to do is come out with the signature ipo of the capital markets perhaps these next ten years going below the offer price on the day that it trades. so we'll see what happens, how frantically the folks at morgan stanley, the brokers that they were calling about two hours ago who were calling their clients and saying, oh, my god. hey, i can get you this for $40 a share, and all these people who were hyped up and thinking they couldn't get facebook stock are now jumping in. i think this is a perfect example of what's great about american capitalism and what's terrible about american capitalism. what's great about it is this guy eight years ago had a dorm room project. it's now worth $100 billion. he's made so much money for himself and so many other people around. he's also created this product that 900 million of us connect to every day, and for the most part, have a very strong, favorable opinion of. the problem is, of course, this is the ultimate, like, .01% deal, if you think about it. from zero to 100 billion, 100
billion today it's worth. but there are only 1,000 people who took advantage of that. you look at the poor suckers in the public market who bought it at anything from 38 to 42 or 3 where it traded today who are now sitting there with basically no return. >> yeah. and that goes to the next portion of our conversation, ari, which is the .01% problem with the facebook deal. we saw the .01% problem with the instagram deal which is we're seeing the software engineers figure out mechanisms basically to aggravate, end or assemble in some way the community and then effectively sell the community to investors without transferring any of the wealth from that sale to the very people who built it. we've talked a little bit, ari, about this on a number of occasions. but what is the next step to take us from being able to assemble the crowd like
facebook, like instagram, but do it in a way that isn't so exploitive of the users? >> you hit it on the head, dylan. this is not a company that produces light bulbs or ipods. this is a company that produces us. it's nothing like us. but it has an architecture. that architecture is not automatic. it was produced by someone who had a company in mind, not the larger user base. it has a term of use policy that takes ownership of everything you put on the site and basically an irrevocable claim to change the contract and keep you bought into it no matter what happens. these are deals that people make without realizing they make them and without realizing the consequences. i think to the next step, the real question is when will the actual rules of the site become tested in a competitive
advantage scenario. the first wave of this isn't facebook cool and it does do a lot of great things. we've talked about other aspects of it. they talk about organ donating on the site and you see huge spikes in participation. the next step may not be simply, can i share a photo, but can i share a photo and retain rights, or maybe even some profits to back like rob was talking about who benefits. we have a tendency in america, because we're optimistic people, to focus on mark zuckerberg or focus on the people who made some money on this deal. for most people, the relationship to facebook is about a user being used, not as a creator being paid. >> this almost puts us in a situation where we're really on the verge of a revolution, toure, not just how we react. we're living through that, but it's almost like the next phase is to say, well, the communities we're relating to in this, this
collective collaboration culture, this explosion around this on shared networks, it's as if the next phase is to include the participants in those networks in the enterprise itself. >> i think that's right. i mean, we saw an extraordinary, almost unusual excitement about this offering. people who generally don't care about the stock market were like, can i get some facebook? it was this crossover moment, and, you know, i called my broker and was like, what do you think, man? i called my friends who work on wall street and financial services and said, what do you think? all of them said don't do it. not now. now is not the time. sdplz they sa >> they said, toure, you're a muppet. don't be a muppet. >> they did. and they pointed out full disclosure. i've had some fortunate moments being in google, being in apple. they were like, this is not that. they're always saying go slower than i want to go, but here they
were definitely like, go slow. part of what they're talking about is, how do we grow? how does facebook grow? what is going to be the future when it closes at the number it opened at, that bolsters what they're saying. also as we move into an area where mobile is more important than desktop, how is facebook going to survive in that world? there may be a day where we're like, hey, kids, i remember when facebook was the dominant thing on computers and in the world, and they're like, what is a facebook? who knows? >> there is no question. krystal, you get the last word on all of this. >> i actually want to pick up on a point that ari made about the fact that we as users are making these deals that a lot of times we don't even know that we're making. we've basically put out to the market that we don't want to pay to get stuff on line, so instead we're paying to put out our personal information. i believe there is a different model we can go to that distributes those resources in a more fair and equitable way, but
the first step is having an understanding of exactly what we're agreeing to on line. and the other piece of this that's interesting, too, that requires a broader conversation but i'll just throw it out there for now, in terms of the 1% problem as well, facebook valued now at over $100 billion? but how many jobs are they creating? they've created this economy, but facebook itself has about 2,000 employees. so that goes to a broader question of what sort of economic model are we going to have? how are we going to create the good well-paying jobs we need in this country to get things back on track. >> or as an alternative, if you could assign the equity to the users in the event the network has value, then at the very least, you are distributing the enterprise value to the people who are creating the value. we're all awaiting ari's users privacy bill of rights that we can start throwing back in their face because you're like, click the box, all right, i'll click
the box. god knows what we all just clicked, but ari is going to save us, i'm sure of it. the mega panel stays, including a bearded stanley cup fan -- i feel like we're hosting hollywood squares today in a weird way. >> the brady bunch. >> brady bunch. everybody stays. coming up on the d.r. show, the windy city sets up to host the g8 summit. one thing to dominate those talks and probably the most significant, afghanistan. michael hersh hrkh fresh back being in country will give us a sense of what he knows that we don't, having been on the ground recently. that's no joke. a man grappling with an alligator. please, sir, what are you thinking? [ male announcer ] the inspiring story
of how a shipping giant can befriend a forest may seem like the stuff of fairy tales. but if you take away the faces on the trees... take away the pixie dust. take away the singing animals, and the storybook narrator... [ man ] you're left with more electric trucks. more recycled shipping materials... and a growing number of lower emissions planes... which still makes for a pretty enchanted tale. ♪ la la la [ man ] whoops, forgot one... [ male announcer ] sustainable solutions. fedex. solutions that matter. but they haven't experienced extra strength bayer advanced aspirin. in fact, in a recent survey, 95% of people who tried it agreed that it relieved their headache fast. visit fastreliefchallenge.com today for a special trial offer.
some developing news out of chicago as we move to the midwest, thousands of occupy protestors gathering as we speak ahead of this weekend's nato summ summit. the crowds expected to larger by the time the summit gets underway, which will be this sunday. these pictures surely at the top of the headlines right now,
however, the most consequential aspect is what they're protesting about. massive spending on foreign wars with no end, money that they believe, and i agree with them, would be better used here at home. 16 heads of state arrive in the windy city this weekend, including the president of pakistan. you can be sure his area of the world will be the hot topic of conversation through the weekend, at least one of them. i want to get to mike barrett who is a ceo diligent innovations. it's a consulting firm. his background includes services as director of strategy for the white house homeland security council under president bush. if you were the chair of that meeting, leading that meeting of 61, mike, what would be the number one problem that you would want to try to resolve in the room, and what would be the greatest asset you would have to do it and what would be the biggest barrier? >> sure. the biggest challenge right now
for nato is they are needing to respond to their domestic constituencies who basically, as we've talked about, want to pull out. everybody thinks if you want to try to fix afghanistan, it's going to take billions and billions of dollars and decades and decades to do it. from the u.s. perspective, it looks like we've decided for whatever reasons we're going to stay but we're only going to stay past the election. we'll put out in 2014, and we're also going to stay for a decade after that at some lower level and we'll basically foot the bill ourselves. so i think the bigger challenge for the u.s. is to get the other people to agree, nato members or not, that they're actually willing to support the stabilization effort, right, which most people don't have a lot of confidence in and actually also collecting that money. the big challenge is going to be a lot of people will pledge it and not deliver on it. obvious obviously, europe is in economic disarray. they have more things to worry about. >> is this meeting a pitch to try to syndicate the financing costs of our plans over the next
decade in that country? >> basically, yes. i mean, most of this stuff, they try to hash it out in advance. it's more about the ceremony than it is about the actual conversations, but yeah. what you've got is three separate competing interests, so each country has a general desire for stability and peace in afghanistan. i think everybody would love to have that as an outcome. then they have their domestic constituencies which are saying, let's get out. we're not seeing any return on our previous investment let alone making another investment. and then we have afghte them sae can't cut out and run. you have to stay there with us, which they're working with the nato allies because of the history of the nato. the french troops are going to pull out earlier, and i think if they head out the door, that's going to put pressure on other countries and nato to say, hey, we have to get out of there.
we'll do some equipment training, maybe some out of country training but we're really not going to stay on the ground and putting our troops at risk because their domestic public in europe is not going to support it. >> which ultimately will put whoever the president of the united states is and congress under pressure because of that isolation. i'm interested in your perspective while i've got you on musharif and pakistan in general, no question that has become the locus of the unknown, the locus of the organizing or disorganizing of whatever the terrorist resistance is along with places like yemen. what, if anything, could nato, could somebody achieve with pakistan in the context of this weekend or in the context of any diplomacy over the next 12 months? >> well, pakistan is clearly one of the two major issues involving afghanistan. ironically, the other one is iran. so, of course, to say we're in
afghanistan because iran is on one side and pakistan is on the other, we're not willing to say that publicly but that's kind of the reality. the challenges with pakistan are we've got to get to some level of peaceful accord with the senior leaders and the intelligence services and the government and the military, because unfortunately, you know, pakistan has a huge safe haven for all sorts of militants that are anti-u.s. and anti-western and they've got nuclear weapons. it's one of these things where you can't just give up on pakistan itself. one of the things i've said and is often lost in the debate is really we're down to two points. one is to cut and run to leave afghanistan. that will give us a chance to regroup and pull ourselves back, give us time to prepare if needed, be prepared if we have to go to iran and deal with issues in iran and the nuclear program. or the other option is to stay in afghanistan and say we need the base, we need the footprint, we need the logistics.
but the problem is we really haven't led onhese issues. the president hadn't talked about afghanistan in a year until he gave a speech about a week ago, we don't have the military out there. we don't have a clear policy of what we want. we're just going to stay about 12 months. >> and that lack of clarity is one of the things that is perhaps the most frustrating for the electrorate and the most difficult to make decisions on. thank you, mike. we'll keep everybody appraised of what happens in those meetings and we'll continue that into next week. i do want to take a momentary break here as we turn from the politics in america to the human beings actually living in afghanistan trying to navigate a fight for peace, the extent to which that means something. michael hersh, fresh back from being in country, giving us a full report just ahead, his insights and what he knows and we don't know about our intent to fight another summer, after this. ugh! all work and no food is making lorenzo very snippy.
oh! seriously?! ♪ [ male announcer ] hunger getting to you? oh... [ male announcer ] grab a ritz crackerfuls. made with real peanut butter and whole grain. mmmm [ male announcer ] get hunger before it gets you. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ i'm here to unleash my inner cowboy. instead i got heartburn. [ horse neighs ] hold up partner. prilosec isn't for fast relief. try alka-seltzer. it kills heartburn fast.
we all have our opinions about afghanistan and the politics are relevant to all of us, our budget and our security. but few of us are able to actually interview and spend time observing the reality of life today in the spring of 2012 in afghanistan. our specialist, however, was afforded that privilege as an american journalist who was able to experience the reality where our military strategy, foreign policy, politics and, yes, spending all collide. his one keg away, there is a difference, he says, between good and afghanistan good. it's a distinction michael hersh can now explain to all of us who have not had the privilege of interacting directly with those in charge and involved with this effort. the chief national correspondent
with the national journal before us and fresh off his trip through afghanistan, including his visits to the regional command in the south -- see that there -- and the reasonabgional command in the east, and michael, what do you know that we should know? >> well, the things might not be quite as grim as you hear back here in the u.s., dylan, in terms of the prospects. yeah, expectations have been reduced. this tart phrase of david petraeus's that people are tossing around now, afghan good enough, which basically means we're going to leave behind a minimally stable country and success will be described as simply the taliban aren't going to take over the government again. yeah, i think it is headed in that direction. but at the same time, there has been a dramatic change in the psychology both on the part of the afghans who are running the government and the new afghan security forces and on the part of the taliban, from what i've been told, because of this u.s.
commitment even though we're drawing down most of our troops, the fact we're going to be paying about $4 billion a year for the afghan security forces, that the u.s. is going to be there in some fashion from 2014 to 2024 and that there's going to be economic security assistance as well has changed what was the taliban narrative, and that was, we're just going to wait out your departure in 2014 and then we're coming back. then it's going to be like it was before 9/11. that, i don't think, is going to happen. i think that it's possible that even with this minimal u.s. presence, that will be enough in addition to the commitments we're getting from the other native at lies we're going to see over the weekend to try to hold the center, as it were. >> tour snerks. >> michael, i just want to hear about what was the most disturbing thing you saw while you were there. >> well, when we went out to gazne, which is in the east, the very troubled east, we were
taken by nato to a village where the governor of gazne made a speech, an impassioned speech, about how these townspeople would believe in the new afghan government. they could get their school going which was built but not operating for three years because of the taliban. we talked to some of these same villager villagers at this meeting, and they said, look, two hours after you leave, the taliban are going to be here and they're probably going to burn all these presents we're getting today, like these thick wool blankets we're getting. just a half hour within leaving that meeting, we began getting shelled by mortars from taliban positions in the mountains. that was an indication to me that in this part of the country, at least, in the east where pakistan is right across the border is very overtly supplying and funding this taliban, that's never going to change. this is going to be a hot spot that simply is not going to be resolved by anything we're doing
now. as i said before, i think the best hope is that you can contain the -- you know, the war to that portion of the country while the rest of it begins to stabilize. >> and just to be clear, the portion you're referring to is that eastern afghani-pakistani border where you can take resources and come west out of pakistan to do that. rob, what's on your mind? >> i'm sort of curious, afghan good enough. good for us as sort of former occupiers. is it good enough for the people of afghanistan? are they actually satisfied with what we're leafing thving them? >> no, they're not, and it's really one of the most moving and dramatic experiences, i think, to go there and talk to the many afghans. we have this image of warlords with black beards that are fighting each other, but 75% of the population of afghanistan is under 25 now.
many young, educated afghans that you meet in kabul, and they say to me, look, everything that's said in washington now becomes policy here. they're hanging on our every word. we all have our experiences of national trauma. hiroshima for the japanese, 9/11 for us. for afghanistan it's abandonment. this is a country that was completely abandoned in 1989 after the cold war, abandoned again after president bush turned to iraq. that's their greatest fear. they're saying, keep us in your attention. don't completely leave us this time and we'll be able to manage that. there's a lot of hope and praying right now. one said when president bush began to talk about human rights, we noticed. well, we don't have to worry about that because the president isn't talking about that anymore. >> you mentioned human rights.
what is the future likely to look like for women and girls in afghanistan? >> again, if we abandon the country and the war goes badly and the taliban begin to move in toward the center of the country, incredibly grim. this is a brutal, brutal foe. i was told the story of a seven-year-old child who wanted to go to school in one of the southern provinces and was captured and actually hung by the taliban as a demonstration effect to other children, particularly females and women. you can't go to school. this is an enemy that pledges a return to these sort of medieval ways. and, you know, that's very much at stake. it's not necessarily something you can deem in the national interest of the united states to preserve the women and children of afghanistan, but it certainly is a humanitarian concern in every way that the humanitarian
intervention in libya was considered, you know, important national policy or to the extent we're debating the same thing in syria now. this is very much a humanitarian issue of what's going to happen to these people if we leave them behind. >> michael, thank you for the time to talk, and thank you for your commitment journalistically in the situation where you have the ability to share this with us. thanks, and again, check out michael's work in the national journal. that's where they public him and that's it. ari, thank you for hanging around. i appreciate that. toure sticks for the rant. krystal and rob, enjoy your weekends. you're saving us from the krystal box rip that's our identity. next up, after biting off more than you could chew, one
but with advair, i'm breathing better so now i can take the lead on a science adventure. advair is clinically proven to help significantly improve lung function. unlike most copd medications, advair contains both an anti-inflammatory and a long-acting bronchodilator, working together to help improve your lung function all day. advair won't replace fast-acting inhalers for sudden symptoms and should not be used more than twice a day. people with copd taking advair may have a higher chance of pneumonia. advair may increase your risk of osteoporosis and some eye problems. tell your doctor if you have a heart condition or high blood pressure before taking advair. if you're still having difficulty breathing, take the lead. ask your doctor if including advair could help improve your lung function. get your first full prescription free and save on refills at advaircopd.com.
that's good morning, veggie style. hmmm. for half the calories plus veggie nutrition. could've had a v8. throughout our entire lives. ♪ one a day men's 50+ is a complete multi-vitamin designed for men's health concerns as we age. ♪ it has more of seven antioxidants to support cell health. that's one a day men's 50+ healthy advantage.
wanted to provide better employee benefits while balancing the company's bottom line, their very first word was... [ to the tune of "lullaby and good night" ] ♪ af-lac ♪ aflac [ male announcer ] find out more at... [ duck ] aflac! [ male announcer ] ...forbusiness.com. [ yawning sound ] here's a question for you. if you spotted a live, eight-foot-long alligator stalking on the side of the road as you make your way to work or maybe to see your family, what would you do? if you happen to be scientist fred boyd, apparently your first instinct is to jump on it and wrestle it. this the scene in north carolina. boyce steps in -- oh! tries to move the alligator. it invaded the yard of a neighbor with young children. he said he used a technique called back jumping. looks like it worked well for him. trying to cover his eyes to calm
it down is the theory. clearly the alligator, however, was not so much feeling the chill vibe, if you know what i'm saying. in hindsight, i'm not sure how throwing a towel on something from behind necessarily creates a calm state. but then again, i'm not a pro like boyce. amazingly, and fortunately, he walked away with just a bite on that right arm. in fact, he told the "today" show this morning that he was more afraid of savannah. >> don't take this personally, but i may have been more comfortable in the ditch with the alligator than i am right now. >> fred, this is going to be a lo lot easier, let me tell you, because i don't bite. >> didn't that man's mom ever teach him not to play with alligators. coming up, from bain fame to ron paul, we're introducing our new segment here in partnership with our friends at the week. looking at the week that was and
what it means for the weeks ahead, after this. you know thats with a private island? really? no. it comes with a hat. see, airline credit cards promise flights for 25,000 miles, but... [ man ] there's never any seats for 25,000 miles. frustrating, isn't it? but that won't happen with the capital one venture card. you can book any airline, anytime. hey, i just said that. after all, isn't traveling hard enough? ow! [ male announcer ] to get the flights you want, sign up for a venture card at capitalone.com. what's in your wallet? uh, it's ok. i've played a pilot before. ♪ got it all. here. have a good day, honey. i love you, ok. bye, mom. [ female announcer ] sam's mom is muddling through her allergies. what can she do? she can get answers at walgreens. with guidance and information to help her make informed choices for her allergy needs. like zyrtec -- with the strength of 24-hour zyrtec, you get relief from your worst allergy symptoms, indoors and out. right now, get a 40 count bonus pack for just $19.99. ♪
find answers at walgreens. you walk into a conventional mattress store, it's really not about you. they say, "well, if you wanted a firm bed you can lie on one of those. if you want a soft bed you can lie on one of those." we provide the exact individualization that your body needs. welcome to the sleep number memorial day sale. where you can celebrate our 25-year commitment to a single mission: better sleep for both of you. never tried this before. this is your body there. you can see a little more pressure in the hips. take it up one notch. oh gosh, yes. when you're playing around with that remote, you get that moment where you go, "oh yeah" oh, yeah! ... and it's perfect. they had no idea that when they came to a sleep number store, we were going to diagnose their problems and help them sleep better. and right now, you can save 40% on our innovative sleep number silver edition bed-for a limited time. once you experience it, there's no going back. wow. hurry in to the sleep number memorial day sale between now and june 3rd. only at the sleep number store, where queen mattresses start at just $699.
avoid bad.fats. don't go over 2000... 1200 calories a day. carbs are bad. carbs are good. the story keeps changing. so i'm not listening... to anyone but myself. i know better nutrition when i see it: great grains. great grains cereal starts whole and stays whole. see the seam? more processed flakes look nothing like natural grains. you can't argue with nutrition you can see. great grains. search great grains and see for yourself. for multi grain flakes that are an excellent source of fiber try great grains banana nut crunch and cranberry almond crunch. ♪ ♪ [ male announcer ] everyone likes a bit of order in their life. virtual wallet helps you get it. keep track of spending, move money with a slide, and use the calendar. all to see your money how you want.
♪ but when i was diagnosed with prostate cancer... i needed a coach. our doctor was great, but with so many tough decisions i felt lost. unitedhealthcare offered us a specially trained rn who helped us weigh and understand all our options. for me cancer was as scary as a fastball is to some of these kids. but my coach had hit that pitch before. turning data into useful answers. we're 78,000 people looking out for 70 million americans. that's health in numbers. unitedhealthcare. we're unveiling a new segment today. in partnership with the week, the magazine aptly titled, this segment aptly titled as well. the week that was, a look back and a look forward, the week that will be as well. ben brewman is our partner in this, and we start with the president himself along with his
rival mitt romney, and of course, bain capital, and whether this story, which was rattled around for a few months here, will get bigger and smaller come november. what say you, ben? >> thank you for having me, dylan. over the last week, president obama and mitt romney have been in a race to define mitt romney's record at bain capital, the private equity firm he founded and led for several years. the president launched a pretty brutal attack ad against mitt romney, spotlighting a steel factory in kansas city that bain took over and several years later the company goes bankrupt, hundreds of people lose their jobs, and bain pockets millions of dollars. of course, this isn't the first time that mitt romney has faced an attack like this. bain has come up in every political race that he's ever run. his campaign, which is really a well oiled machine in boston, was ready. they rebuted with a slick web video of their own near hours
later. we can expect more of this. the president is not either to run on his own economic record, but the economy, as we know, stands to be the number one issue in november. it resonates with voters in a way that gay marriage or even the war in afghanistan, important as they may be, simply don't, at least not with as wide of a swath of voters. for president obama, much like george w. bush tried to pass john kerry's war record in 2004, you can expect the president to do the same thing with mitt romney and bain. >> the other big distinction, before we move on to ron paul, is historically the awareness between practices and value practices and capitalism, really is wasn't part of the narrative. so it was one thing to dismiss bain five or ten years ago when there wasn't the underlying awareness of just how corruptive
the debt markets are. i would agree with you that i think this is a bigger problem for him especially in the context of jamie dimon and some of these other things which just echo back to what kind of businessman is this? next, a man certainly among the most principaled in the recent history of this country's congressional service. you say the end of the road for ron paul calling it a career? >> that's right. ron paul has suspended his presidential campaign and he's not running for reelection in the house. this is effectively the end of his political career, at least in elected office. but this is a guy who has really reshaped the american political landscape over the last several decades. he's brought libertarian into the mainstream, his positions, many of which are pretty aggressive, a limited government vision, have become real touchstones for the tea party. you know, he's a guy who has developed a very devoted following, millions upon millions of people who are eager to give him money, eager to show
up at campaign rallies, at state conventions, and his following and the movement that he's helped create, you know, it won't be over with him, even though for all intents and purposes his role as an active campaigner in the presidential race is over. >> it will be interesting, though, because again, he goes through an economic narrative. and his following while i know he had a difficult time growing beyond certain thresholds, the base that man holds, as you and i both know, are the most engaged and the most loyal and that will be an interesting dynamic to watch as he moves away from this. let's move into the high consequence business of producing tv shows, for goodness sakes, ben. it's not what are the shows at this point, it's how are the networks adapting to this new content paradigm which is so much less attached to a new fall show and so much more attached to a three-minute video on their
iphones? >> that's exactly right, dylan, and as you suggest, facebook ipo hysteria and the mess at jpmorgan, the four big networks staged their up fronts, which are essentially a coming out party, a dog and pony show, if you will, where they tried out stars and they let advertisers and critics get a taste of what shows are coming this fall. 16 of the 36 new shows will be comedies which in many ways is something of a throwback in recent years. we've seen reality shows, we've seen procedural dramas, and, you know, this could be seen as a statement from the tv networks. they think their business model is quite relevant even in today's age of smartphone addiction. >> listen, more power to them. i always enjoyed a good sitcom when they actually existed, so, listen, who is to say we won't
enjoy another one. ben, welcome aboard. i look forward to seeing you next week. >> great. >> no pun intended. still to come, here is ben froman for the week. you can see toure cold chilling in the back of the control room ready to serve and end the week for the rant, right after this. . i don't think aspirin's for body pain. aspirin is just old school. people have doubts about taking aspirin for pain. but they haven't experienced extra strength bayer advanced aspirin. in fact, in a recent survey, 92% of people who tried it said they would buy it again. what's different? it has micro-particles. enters the bloodstream fast and rushes relief to the site of pain. visit fastreliefchallenge.com today for a special trial offer.
visit fastreliefchallenge.com ♪ [ acou[ sighs ]ar: slow ] [ announcer ] all work and no play... will make brady miss his favorite part of the day. ♪ [ upbeat ] [ barking ] [ whines ] that's why there's beneful playful life, made with energy-packed wholesome grains... and real beef and egg. to help you put more play in your day. beneful. play. it's good for you.
beastie boys made music that was a big part of my childhood and it feels like a piece of my youth has died with them. summer was an extraordinary artist who had a long list of hit singles, including one of the greatest records of all time "love to love you baby." she was the queen of disco, an exuberant dance centric in a pop movement that was about love and labor and youthism. in disco, the thought that they suck is bizarre. donna summer sucks? that would mean that michael jackson's "off the wall" sucks. blasphemy. disco's ethos was the opposite
of rock which told about the primecy of americans. partly why we love certain types of music is it connects us to a community we aspire to be connected to. disco was upwardly gay people and black women and black people and women. this cannot be connected to disco of a genre of music in american history. the death of music in the '70s which included the classic vinyl in chicago looked like the salem witch trials. they said it felt like nazi book burning. why did it happen? it wasn't because disco was bad, it wasn't. those songs hold up well, and besides, bad artists and songs are allowed to succeed all the time. britn britney, hello! no, the attack was clearly rooted in an attack on
constituency and homophobia and the impact of keeping the gay culture from celebrating the mainstream of society. it was an attack on gay joy entering the natural consciousness. in this way it is related to marriage equality which refuses to allow gay joy about love to become public and celebrated and official. but disco survived as a sound even though the word became a pejorative just as the fight for marriage equality will eventually be one, and one day we'll look back and say, what was all the fuss about? godspeed, donna summer. thank you for all the joy you brought into all of our lives. >> well said, my friend. some very deep and pointed analysis there that i'm certainly in no position to dispute. however, i believe that you have missed a significant component of all this, which is the rejection of the pants.
are you sure it wasn't just the pants? it might have been racism, it might have been homophobia, i can't dispute that, but, you know, those pants and those collars, you know? no? >> rock had some funny pants, too. >> that's a very good point. in fact, i would say the straight white wardrobing may have been more offensive. >> all that is true. >> but this is not a fashion segment and you have spoken the truth. >> it has become one. >> i just made it one at the end of the show because it's a rare opportunity i can speak to such things so i took advantage of it. we will all miss donna summer and we thank toure for his words today. up next is "hardball with chris matthews" which begins right now. >> when in doubt, attack the preacher. this is